N.KANNADASAN, J. - (1.) When the matter came up on earlier occasion an order was passed stating as follows: The matter stands adjourned finally to enable the petitioner to report as to whether a regular appeal is filed against the order passed by the District Forum in CC.42/2007. If no regular appeal is filed already or within a reasonable time, the above petition will be disposed off on merits. Subsequently, when the matter came up on 8.9.2008 there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Even today there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
(2.) The above Revision Petition is filed by raising the following grounds on the part of the petitioner The District Forum ought not to have passed orders on the Execution Petition, in view of the fact that regular appeal passed as against the District Forum is pending before the State Commission. Further ground raised to the effect that eventhough the fact of pendency of appeal was brought to the knowledge of the District Forum, the impugned order dt. 27.6.2008 in E.P.No.6/2008 ought not to have been passed.
(3.) The District Forum proceeded with the matter by observing that in the absence of any order of stay is obtained, there is no impediment to proceed with the matter. In this connection, it is useful to refer to the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court, reported in II (2004) CPJ 12 (SC) in Gaziabad Development Authority Vs. Balbir Singh, wherein it is observed that unless stay is obtained from higher Forum, mere fact of filing an appeal / revision, will not entitle the authority not to comply with the order of the Forum.;